'Value Gap B/W Constitutional & Social Norms': Allahabad HC Slams Family's Objection To Woman Marrying Man Of Choice

Strongly condemning familial resistance to a woman's decision to marry a person of her choice, the Allahabad High Court recently protected a 27-year-old woman who feared abduction, purportedly because she wanted to marry a person of her choice. A bench of Justice JJ Munir and Justice Praveen Kumar Giri termed such objections 'despicable' and underscored that the right to marry a person of one's choice is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. “It is despicable that the petitioners should object to the decision of an adult member of the family, a woman 27 years of age, from marrying a man of her choice. At least that is the right which every adult has under the Constitution by virtue of Article 21,” the bench remarked. While the Court clarified that it did not know whether the petitioners, the woman's father and brother, "really intend to abduct" her, it noted that the matter reflected a larger societal issue, i.e., the 'value gap' between constitutional and social norms: “The fact that there is social and familial resistance to the exercise of such right is a glaring depiction of the 'value gap' between the constitutional norms and those social. So long as there is a gap between the values fostered by the Constitution and those cherished by the society, these kinds of incidents would continue to happen.” The bench was essentially dealing with a plea moved by the father and brother (the petitioners) of the woman (respondent no. 4) seeking quashing of the FIR lodged by her under Sections 140(3), 62, and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). In the FIR, she alleged a threat of abduction for wanting to marry a man of her choice. Though the bench stayed the arrest of the petitioners in connection with the FIR, it also restrained them from interfering in the woman's life or from assaulting, threatening or contacting her or the man she intends to marry or live with. “The petitioners shall not contact the fourth respondent over telephone or any other electronic device or using the internet or through friends or associates. The Police are also restrained from interfering with the fourth respondent's freedom and liberty in any manner, whatsoever,” the bench directed. The Court also issued notices to the state government and other authorities and granted them three weeks to file a counter-affidavit in the matter. The matter has now been posted for admission on July 18, 2025.

'Value Gap B/W Constitutional & Social Norms': Allahabad HC Slams Family's Objection To Woman Marrying Man Of Choice

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags